Are There Really Two Gospels?

[HebrewVaquero]

open heart,

1. Matthew 5:17-19 was the teaching of the law for Jesus was born of a woman made under the law of Moses. He didn't come to abolish the law in his ministry but to fulfill it. The law of Moses was only for a time till the seed should come. This has to be understood in the difference of the law of Moses and the law of Christ.

2. The law was forever for the jews because their culture was totally wrapped up in it. This is why Jews can still be jews culturally but they can not do it for purpose of attaining righteousness or salvation. This is why they are blinded as the nation itself for the most part. 2 Corinthians 3:1-16 explains this with Moses and the veil over his head for one: the children of Israel could not behold what would come concerning the old covenant and its glory passing away. This in no way disses the law of Moses for it was holy and good (Romans 7:12) but the new covenant was built on better promises and had to replace the law of commandments according to the Mosaic ethic and the endless life of the finished work of Christ (Hebrews 8:6-7).

3. The new covenant is not the old covenant reformed. The law of Moses was because of transgression but it was still the law of God and for a specific reason which was when the seed should come. This doesn't mean that Jesus taught the new covenant when he was born or in his ministry but he was the transition between law and grace and had to fulfill the law before he died and then the old testament law would have served its purpose and no longer needed for Christ made a better way through his finished work.

4. Just because there are similarities because of the moral aspect doesn't mean the old covenant is reformed. If you have a will you can change it and have similar, different and things that were exactly the same but they would not be considered the same in totality.

5. There are many things that had to be changed that were major they could not be the same and the ethic and the result of what that ethic and how it made them respond is different and Christ is the more perfect way to attain to salvation and righteous living in everyday life.

6. So, yes Matthew 5:17-19 was in a different age which we were never under that ethic and this is why that Christ didn't say anything about the law being abolished. If he would have taught anything else he would have never gotten anywhere in his ministry to the jews for the leaders would have automatically accused him of false teaching and got rid of him then. Proper context of proper time factors are important to understand the truth of what is being said and why. Jerry kelso

Ah yes, it makes so much sense; Jesus said He 'didn't come to abolish the law but to fulfill the law' in order to abolish the law.

The only thing left to explain is how Jesus prophesied clear until the end of the age but failed to prophesy 6 months ahead that the law was to be annulled?

 

[Berean777]

Jesus alludes to two types of Gospels in
Matthew 5:17-19
*One for those who keep and teach the Law
*One for those who teach the Law is annulled

So according to you which one encompasses salvation?

 

[HebrewVaquero]

So according to you which one encompasses salvation?

Both: (verse 19)
"Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven;"
There's one gospel ^

"but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven."
And here's the second ^

 

[Berean777]

Both: (verse 19)
"Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven;"
There's one gospel ^

"but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven."
And here's the second ^

Verse 19 doesn't say to keep the law externally through ritualistic Jewish temple centred worship, for the sin offering, right?

The law of Moses went hand in hand with the ritualistic Jewish mass, where an animal was slaughtered and the blood sprinkled on the altar, then the offering would be burnt. The smell of the burnt animal was so strong that it required frankincense (Bis-Ma), in order to neutralise the odour.

The context of the law in verse 19 is not outward in the flesh and in keeping to the letter of the law, that was legislated in ecclesiastics. You a messianic are saying that this form of worship continues to encompass salvation in the new covenant age. So based on your reply, it would still be temple centred worship and one that is outward in observance to the letter of the law and pertaining to ordinances mentioned in ecclesiastics.

Now you do realise that if one continued in these Old Testament Jewish practice as a means for the sole purpose of salvation after the cross, then it really undermines the works of the Lord and the blood atonement paid in full on the cross at Calvary.

True worship as Jesus said is not temple centred worship and the laws even though they are required to be kept, were not tied to the ordinances of ecclesiastics and no apostle ever refered to ecclesiastics. Jesus would summarise the Ten Commandments in two and these two would form the foundation of the New Testament faith in Christ. This means that according to Joel and other prophets who prophesied of a time that the laws would be internalised in the heart of believers and the observances and worship would be in the Spirit. So the old form of ritualistic Jewish sacrificial system tied to salvation was abolished on the cross at Calvary.

If there was a system of priesthood that was tied to the old Pharisaical levitical priesthood, then that system no longer has salvation tied to it, because the levitical priesthood was replaced by the Melchizedek under Christ our Kingly High Priest.

In short there is only one gospel and one way in keeping with the law. Outward fleshly observances of ordinances and ritualistic sacrificial systems, is not in keeping with the law as far as God is concerned.

Jesus said......

Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. (John 4:23)

So the Father no longer seeks the old Jewish system of worship which was directly tied to the letter of the law and in keeping of Mitvahs (ordinances), which was centred around temple worship.

So can you see the fallacy in your statement which stated.....

"One for those who keep and teach the law"
"One for those who teach the law is annulled"

You see no Christian teaches the law, because the law is internalised in the heart as summarised by Jesus as follows..... To love your God with all your mind, heart and soul and secondly to do the same for your neighbour. In fact true Christians don't say the law is annulled, neither do they teach one another the law, for the born again Christains are the walking and breathing law and are therefore representatives of God, having the testimony of his Son, which is tied to the one and only gospel which has the mosaic law fulfilled in Christ.

Romans 2:14
Even Gentiles, who do not have God's written law, show that they know his law when they instinctively obey it, even without having heard it.

So why does a believer need another to teach them the Pharisaical mosaic law, when the Spirit of truth counsels and guides them to live the law, rather than to observe old covenant observances in order to be counted as having fulfilled the law, you see there is a big difference.

The old covenant system being applied in the New Testament age is counterproductive and counterintuitive to say the least and it simply has no place within the context of salvation, for the sole reason that it is crossless.

Hebrew 8:11
And they will not need to teach their neighbors, nor will they need to teach their relatives, saying, 'You should know the LORD.' For everyone, from the least to the greatest, will know me already

 

[jerry kelso]

Ah yes, it makes so much sense; Jesus said He 'didn't come to abolish the law but to fulfill the law' in order to abolish the law.

The only thing left to explain is how Jesus prophesied clear until the end of the age but failed to prophesy 6 months ahead that the law was to be annulled?

hebrewvaquero,

1. This is a great question and I understand the implications of Christ not prophesying the law to be annulled. This is a rift between the jewish and gentile communities because the perception is that it was a bad system of living the commandments and obeying God. It is true that many christians think nothing but bad about the old covenant. The law was holy and good but there were certain things that had to be done away with and replaced because of the weakness of the commandment. What was actually abolished and why?

2. Calvin believed that the sacrificial system and the civil law was abolished but not the moral law.

3. The old covenant was wrapped up in types and shadows and were done away with at Calvary unless fulfilled with the reality.
The sacrificial system is clearly seen of being abolished in Hebrews 9:9-10. Colossians 2:14; handwriting of ordinances that was against us; nailed it to the cross.

4. The civil law is not plainly spoken as being done away with. However, in 1 Timothy 1:9 said the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, etc. Verse 7 says this was talking about those who desired to be a teacher of the law. The essence is that christians shouldn't be subdued by the law of trying to attain in self effort. It is to be who we are in Christ based on his finished work.
Under the law of Moses being a follower of God was to be who they were but to accomplish this is was different than today. They didn't have the Holy Spirit residing in them 24-7 and the law of sin and death took advantage of the Mosaic law and made them live to the frailty of man. This law of sin and death was done away with by the law of the Spirit. The law of the Spirit is not the law according to Moses righteousness of those that do them shall live in them.

5. In the antediluvian period there was no written law but when they obeyed or disobeyed according to their conscience that was contained in the written law later was a law unto themselves. Sin is always sin and wrong and Cain knew about the conscience and wanted to be protected from those who would want to kill him for killing his brother Abel. So there has always been a law though in different forms. You wouldn't say that we live under the law of conscious? Why? Because we have a different ethic and we have the completeness of the redemptive plan of God through the finished work of Christ.

7. The moral law is said to not be able to be abolished. This is true within itself as God is the moral governor of the universe and must have moral law to rule. It shows us what is right and wrong. So how could it be abolished? Well, the moral law was done away in the fact of according to the Mosaic ethic and judgement attached to it. The law had a specific blessing and cursing system and specific judgements such as stoning for adultery. This is not true today.
The abolishment of the old covenant and it's glory was done away which included the 10 commandments (2 Corinthians 3:7) and is based on the fact of the law being one whole unit. James said if you offend in one point of the law you have sinned in the whole law.

8. Jeremiah 31 and Hebrews 8 both show that Israel would have a new covenant that would be completely different than the law of Moses when they come out of Egypt of which they broke.

9. Jesus role as Messiah was to preach the KoH and the KoG message and to be the sacrifice for the whole world and it's redemption, the fullness of grace and truth.

10. Everything was not understood about the law being abolished and we can see this in gradual revelation. For instance, the body of Christ was not understood in the early church of jews and gentiles. This did not come to fruition until the vision of the clean and the unclean to Peter and Paul who was to bring the revelation of the mystery of Christ more to fruition. Read Ephesians 2. Even Peter didn't understand alot of things Paul said but he believed him.
Even before the gentiles came clearer into the picture in the early church the jews and the judaizers were always were at odds with each other about the law of Moses. It was so bad that Paul was being abused and eventually went to the gentiles because the jews wouldn't listen to him. Romans 16.

11. Some will say that the kingdom message was given another chance to Israel because of the like signs that were happening and the bulk of the early church was jewish. Jesus had already pronounced judgement over Israel before he went back to heaven and there were no prophecies saying they would be given another chance at that time (Acts 1:6-7). The jewish apostles tend to have a slant of the kingdom message in their books for they knew it was eternal. Paul was more of the exception concerning his ministry to the gentiles and his epistles.

12. The jews in the early church came out of the Messiah's ministry and they knew their covenant promises so Jesus role was not to clearly tell the abolishment of the law especially for the jews were to have the law forever and were to be at the head of the nations. Even the male and the female operate differently in the law according to certain commandments that address their specific roles and related things to gender. Gentiles would certainly be different for Peter said why make them bear the yoke of bondage which they or their father's could not bear. They were to abstain from things strangled with blood, and meats offered to idols and abstain from fornication (Acts 15). Even water baptism in the purification jewish rites was not anything the gentiles were under (Acts 21). Even at that Paul only did this to become like the jew to win them to Christ.

13. This all goes to the point that the body of Christ is jews and gentiles that are one. Concerning the law for jews should be under the new covenant and at the same time there culture was intertwined and they can still be jews but they cannot look at the commandment of mere self effort to achieve salvation in the letter of the law, it must be the spirit of the law. I think for both jews and gentiles in the overall sense it is the overall system and mechanics of the law is what is different under the new covenant.
Jews for example, will not eat pork even though I see no violation if they did eat it as sinning against God because God told Paul not to judge any man according to meat and drinks etc. At the same time if a gentile doesn't eat pork because it is a smart thing nutritionally is not wrong or a sin. A jew has cultural things that are exclusively jew versus gentiles such as the phylacteries and mitzvah etc. The feasts are eternal. These are to be done in the spirit of the law and not the letter of the law.

14. So the Messiah's role was not to prophesy about the law being annulled. Because the law is one whole unit and the 10 commandments was a major part of the spiritual aspect which was the moral law outside of the sabbath. The sacrificial, civil, and the moral laws according to Moses of which came because of transgressions and was only till the seed should come. The new covenant was built on better promises and the yoke of bondage not being put on the gentiles which infers the jews culture and the law being intertwined with jews and gradual revelation are some of the reasons why Jesus didn't preach the clearest way of annulment of the law of Moses in his earthly ministry not to mention the indictment of false teaching.

If you still have questions then you may have to be more specific. Thanks Jerry kelso

 

[HebrewVaquero]

Verse 19 doesn't say to keep the law externally through ritualistic Jewish temple centred worship, for the sin offering, right?

Not applicable. No Temple.

The law of Moses went hand in hand with the ritualistic Jewish mass, where an animal was slaughtered and the blood sprinkled on the altar, then the offering would be burnt. The smell of the burnt animal was so strong that it required frankincense (Bis-Ma), in order to neutralise the odour.

The context of the law in verse 19 is not outward in the flesh and in keeping to the letter of the law, that was legislated in ecclesiastics. You a messianic are saying that this form of worship continues to encompass salvation in the new covenant age. So based on your reply, it would still be temple centred worship and one that is outward in observance to the letter of the law and pertaining to ordinances mentioned in ecclesiastics.

See Ezekiel 46-47 : sacrifice will be reinstated

Now you do realise that if one continued in these Old Testament Jewish practice as a means for the sole purpose of salvation after the cross, then it really undermines the works of the Lord and the blood atonement paid in full on the cross at Calvary.

Just as Passover is celebrated in remembrance and Christendom's communion, so sacrifice will be in remembrance.
If a lamb was slaughtered in church every Sunday in front of the attendees, that would be the end of cheap grace.

True worship as Jesus said is not temple centred worship and the laws even though they are required to be kept, were not tied to the ordinances of ecclesiastics and no apostle ever refered to ecclesiastics. Jesus would summarise the Ten Commandments in two and these two would form the foundation of the New Testament faith in Christ. This means that according to Joel and other prophets who prophesied of a time that the laws would be internalised in the heart of believers and the observances and worship would be in the Spirit. So the old form of ritualistic Jewish sacrificial system tied to salvation was abolished on the cross at Calvary.

If there was a system of priesthood that was tied to the old Pharisaical levitical priesthood, then that system no longer has salvation tied to it, because the levitical priesthood was replaced by the Melchizedek under Christ our Kingly High Priest.

In short there is only one gospel and one way in keeping with the law. Outward fleshly observances of ordinances and ritualistic sacrificial systems, is not in keeping with the law as far as God is concerned.

For this age

Jesus said......

Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. (John 4:23)

So the Father no longer seeks the old Jewish system of worship which was directly tied to the letter of the law and in keeping of Mitvahs (ordinances), which was centred around temple worship.

So can you see the fallacy in your statement which stated.....

"One for those who keep and teach the law"
"One for those who teach the law is annulled"

You see no Christian teaches the law, because the law is internalised in the heart as summarised by Jesus as follows..... To love your God with all your mind, heart and soul and secondly to do the same for your neighbour. In fact true Christians don't say the law is annulled, neither do they teach one another the law, for the born again Christains are the walking and breathing law and are therefore representatives of God, having the testimony of his Son, which is tied to the one and only gospel which has the mosaic law fulfilled in Christ.



So why does a believer need another to teach them the Pharisaical mosaic law, when the Spirit of truth counsels and guides them to live the law, rather than to observe old covenant observances in order to be counted as having fulfilled the law, you see there is a big difference.

The old covenant system being applied in the New Testament age is counterproductive and counterintuitive to say the least and it simply has no place within the context of salvation, for the sole reason that it is crossless.

All I can say is you are in condridiction of the plain words of Jesus. You've let the writings ascribed to Paul and interpreted by the Church confuse.

 

[HebrewVaquero]

hebrewvaquero,

1. This is a great question and I understand the implications of Christ not prophesying the law to be annulled. This is a rift between the jewish and gentile communities because the perception is that it was a bad system of living the commandments and obeying God. It is true that many christians think nothing but bad about the old covenant. The law was holy and good but there were certain things that had to be done away with and replaced because of the weakness of the commandment. What was actually abolished and why?

2. Calvin believed that the sacrificial system and the civil law was abolished but not the moral law.

3. The old covenant was wrapped up in types and shadows and were done away with at Calvary unless fulfilled with the reality.
The sacrificial system is clearly seen of being abolished in Hebrews 9:9-10. Colossians 2:14; handwriting of ordinances that was against us; nailed it to the cross.

4. The civil law is not plainly spoken as being done away with. However, in 1 Timothy 1:9 said the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, etc. Verse 7 says this was talking about those who desired to be a teacher of the law. The essence is that christians shouldn't be subdued by the law of trying to attain in self effort. It is to be who we are in Christ based on his finished work.
Under the law of Moses being a follower of God was to be who they were but to accomplish this is was different than today. They didn't have the Holy Spirit residing in them 24-7 and the law of sin and death took advantage of the Mosaic law and made them live to the frailty of man. This law of sin and death was done away with by the law of the Spirit. The law of the Spirit is not the law according to Moses righteousness of those that do them shall live in them.

5. In the antediluvian period there was no written law but when they obeyed or disobeyed according to their conscience that was contained in the written law later was a law unto themselves. Sin is always sin and wrong and Cain knew about the conscience and wanted to be protected from those who would want to kill him for killing his brother Abel. So there has always been a law though in different forms. You wouldn't say that we live under the law of conscious? Why? Because we have a different ethic and we have the completeness of the redemptive plan of God through the finished work of Christ.

7. The moral law is said to not be able to be abolished. This is true within itself as God is the moral governor of the universe and must have moral law to rule. It shows us what is right and wrong. So how could it be abolished? Well, the moral law was done away in the fact of according to the Mosaic ethic and judgement attached to it. The law had a specific blessing and cursing system and specific judgements such as stoning for adultery. This is not true today.
The abolishment of the old covenant and it's glory was done away which included the 10 commandments (2 Corinthians 3:7) and is based on the fact of the law being one whole unit. James said if you offend in one point of the law you have sinned in the whole law.

8. Jeremiah 31 and Hebrews 8 both show that Israel would have a new covenant that would be completely different than the law of Moses when they come out of Egypt of which they broke.

9. Jesus role as Messiah was to preach the KoH and the KoG message and to be the sacrifice for the whole world and it's redemption, the fullness of grace and truth.

10. Everything was not understood about the law being abolished and we can see this in gradual revelation. For instance, the body of Christ was not understood in the early church of jews and gentiles. This did not come to fruition until the vision of the clean and the unclean to Peter and Paul who was to bring the revelation of the mystery of Christ more to fruition. Read Ephesians 2. Even Peter didn't understand alot of things Paul said but he believed him.
Even before the gentiles came clearer into the picture in the early church the jews and the judaizers were always were at odds with each other about the law of Moses. It was so bad that Paul was being abused and eventually went to the gentiles because the jews wouldn't listen to him. Romans 16.

11. Some will say that the kingdom message was given another chance to Israel because of the like signs that were happening and the bulk of the early church was jewish. Jesus had already pronounced judgement over Israel before he went back to heaven and there were no prophecies saying they would be given another chance at that time (Acts 1:6-7). The jewish apostles tend to have a slant of the kingdom message in their books for they knew it was eternal. Paul was more of the exception concerning his ministry to the gentiles and his epistles.

12. The jews in the early church came out of the Messiah's ministry and they knew their covenant promises so Jesus role was not to clearly tell the abolishment of the law especially for the jews were to have the law forever and were to be at the head of the nations. Even the male and the female operate differently in the law according to certain commandments that address their specific roles and related things to gender. Gentiles would certainly be different for Peter said why make them bear the yoke of bondage which they or their father's could not bear. They were to abstain from things strangled with blood, and meats offered to idols and abstain from fornication (Acts 15). Even water baptism in the purification jewish rites was not anything the gentiles were under (Acts 21). Even at that Paul only did this to become like the jew to win them to Christ.

13. This all goes to the point that the body of Christ is jews and gentiles that are one. Concerning the law for jews should be under the new covenant and at the same time there culture was intertwined and they can still be jews but they cannot look at the commandment of mere self effort to achieve salvation in the letter of the law, it must be the spirit of the law. I think for both jews and gentiles in the overall sense it is the overall system and mechanics of the law is what is different under the new covenant.
Jews for example, will not eat pork even though I see no violation if they did eat it as sinning against God because God told Paul not to judge any man according to meat and drinks etc. At the same time if a gentile doesn't eat pork because it is a smart thing nutritionally is not wrong or a sin. A jew has cultural things that are exclusively jew versus gentiles such as the phylacteries and mitzvah etc. The feasts are eternal. These are to be done in the spirit of the law and not the letter of the law.

14. So the Messiah's role was not to prophesy about the law being annulled. Because the law is one whole unit and the 10 commandments was a major part of the spiritual aspect which was the moral law outside of the sabbath. The sacrificial, civil, and the moral laws according to Moses of which came because of transgressions and was only till the seed should come. The new covenant was built on better promises and the yoke of bondage not being put on the gentiles which infers the jews culture and the law being intertwined with jews and gradual revelation are some of the reasons why Jesus didn't preach the clearest way of annulment of the law of Moses in his earthly ministry not to mention the indictment of false teaching.

If you still have questions then you may have to be more specific. Thanks Jerry kelso

It is not that complicated.
It was the PENALTY which is annulled for those who follow the promised Messiah.
Many instructions cannot be followed for external reasons such as no Temple, no priests....

 

[jerry kelso]

It is not that complicated.
It was the PENALTY which is annulled for those who follow the promised Messiah.
Many instructions cannot be followed for external reasons such as no Temple, no priests....

hebrewvaquero,

The penalty was the curse of the law (Galatians 3:13). The curse actually had to be sin that kept them from receiving the promise of the Spirit through faith (Galatians 3:14). At the same time verse 10 those who do the works of the law are under the curse for works do not justify in the same manner as the justification by grace. Works is a fruit of grace in obedience. Abraham obeyed God and offered up Isaac so he was justified by his works as a fruit of obedience. Faith without works is dead but the law was not of faith (Galatians 3:12).
Having no temple, no priests etc. are a reason the law cannot be followed but it is not the main reason instructions cannot be followed. Christ had to change all this through his priesthood which was of Melchizadek and not the levitical priesthood. The temple, priests etc. were filled with types and shadows of certain realities. This can be seen in the tabernacle of Moses and David.
Do you believe that the Mosaic law was not abolished or do you believe that it is a continuation in a modified way? Let me know. Thanks Jerry Kelso

 

[HebrewVaquero]

hebrewvaquero,

The penalty was the curse of the law (Galatians 3:13). The curse actually had to be sin that kept them from receiving the promise of the Spirit through faith (Galatians 3:14). At the same time verse 10 those who do the works of the law are under the curse for works do not justify in the same manner as the justification by grace. Works is a fruit of grace in obedience. Abraham obeyed God and offered up Isaac so he was justified by his works as a fruit of obedience. Faith without works is dead but the law was not of faith (Galatians 3:12).
Having no temple, no priests etc. are a reason the law cannot be followed but it is not the main reason instructions cannot be followed. Christ had to change all this through his priesthood which was of Melchizadek and not the levitical priesthood. The temple, priests etc. were filled with types and shadows of certain realities. This can be seen in the tabernacle of Moses and David.
Do you believe that the Mosaic law was not abolished or do you believe that it is a continuation in a modified way? Let me know. Thanks Jerry Kelso

I believe;
•the Law of Moses is not abolished.
•the Law's penalty is abolished for the repentant.

•I don't believe salvation is by grace alone apart from works.
•I don't believe salvation is by works alone apart from grace.

*I believe salvation is a synergistic relationship between grace, works and faith.

 

[jerry kelso]

I believe;
•the Law of Moses is not abolished.
•the Law's penalty is abolished for the repentant.

•I don't believe salvation is by grace alone apart from works.
•I don't believe salvation is by works alone apart from grace.

*I believe salvation is a synergistic relationship between grace, works and faith.

hebrewvaquero,

The law of Moses had 630 laws and the jews had to keep it to be blessed. Do you keep all these laws and do you keep all the feasts? Let me know how you live according to the law of Moses. Jerry Kelso

 

[Berean777]

Not applicable. No Temple.



See Ezekiel 46-47 : sacrifice will be reinstated

Just as Passover is celebrated in remembrance and Christendom's communion, so sacrifice will be in remembrance.
If a lamb was slaughtered in church every Sunday in front of the attendees, that would be the end of cheap grace.

For this age


All I can say is you are in condridiction of the plain words of Jesus. You've let the writings ascribed to Paul and interpreted by the Church confuse.

Did you say sacrifices will be reinstated? What for!

 

[Berean777]

How could keeping ordinances count as works towards one's salvation. The very thought of thinking of works and sacrifices outside of the one for all sacrifice on the cross at Calvary, is one that denies God's plan through the Messiah.

Jesus said to follow me. If observing the Mosiac law is to follow Moses, then we have Messianics following the servant Moses, instead of the Messiah.

I would like to kindly ask all Messianics the following.......

How could your group be differentiated from those who follow John the Baptist? Are you guys not similar to those who follow the servant instead of the Messiah?

Salvation is justification by faith in Christ (Blood covenant - one for all sacrifice) and sanctification by the works of the Holy Ghost.

Do you think the Holy Ghost is telling the Messianics to abandon the cross and to follow Moses?

But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead; (Romans 4:24)

The works spoken in the New Testament are not Mosaic ordinances (Mitzvahs), rather they are tied to the beatitudes of Christ manifested in us through the works of the Holy Ghost. As we are sanctified by the Spirit we are becoming more like Christ and being made in his personage. So that by this reasoning alone, we are being adopted into God's family as his sons.

The Old Testament Jews that followed the mosaic law under Moses were not under adoption, neither were they called sons of God, but according to Old Testament scriptures they are called servants of God who fell under the curse of the law.

So which way do Messianics want to go........

1. Follow Moses and the mosaic law
2. Follow Jesus and his beatidudes

Only number 2. is counted as being the sanctifying works of the Spirit and counted towards ome's salvation. Number 1. is no different to the world that believes not in God. I mean the Muslims like the Jews observe similar ordinances and therefore have no adoption as they are married to ordinances. I look at Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists and atheists as one in the same group of unbelievers, who know not God.

 

[HebrewVaquero]

hebrewvaquero,

The law of Moses had 630 laws and the jews had to keep it to be blessed. Do you keep all these laws and do you keep all the feasts? Let me know how you live according to the law of Moses. Jerry Kelso

613 laws
Laws for the Temple, Women, Farmers, Israeli Nationals, Priests ect.... Don't apply to me so that leaves surprisingly few. As for a Feasts, I kept the spring feasts this year, but slacked on the fall feasts except one. Keep most of the laws that apply to me except a few like Tzitzits and wearing different fabrics. Looking to do Tzitzits soon but my local synagogue is reformed and not super serious about a lot. There is always a Talmudic/Rabbinic loop hole some where lol.

 

[HebrewVaquero]

Do you say sacrifices will be reinstated? What for!

Remembrance

 

[HebrewVaquero]

How could keeping ordinances count as works towards one's salvation. The very thought of thinking of works and sacrifices outside of the one for all sacrifice on the cross at Calvary, is one that denies God's plan through the Messiah.

Jesus said to follow me. If observing the Mosiac law is to follow Moses, then we have Messianics following the servant Moses, instead of the Messiah.

I would like to kindly ask all Messianics the following.......

How could your group be differentiated from those who follow John the Baptist? Are you guys not similar to those who follow the servant instead of the Messiah?

Salvation is justification by faith in Christ (Blood covenant - one for all sacrifice) and sanctification by the works of the Holy Ghost.

Do you think the Holy Ghost is telling the Messianics to abandon the cross and to follow Moses?

But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead; (Romans 4:24)

The works spoken in the New Testament are not Mosaic ordinances (Mitzvahs), rather they are tied to the beatitudes of Christ manifested in us through the works of the Holy Ghost. As we are sanctified by the Spirit we are becoming more like Christ and being made in his personage. So that by this reasoning alone, we are being adopted into God's family as his sons.

The Old Testament Jews that followed the mosaic law under Moses were not under adoption, neither were they called sons of God, but according to Old Testament scriptures they are called servants of God who fell under the curse of the law.

So which way do Messianics want to go........

1. Follow Moses and the mosaic law
2. Follow Jesus and his beatidudes

Only number 2. is counted as being the sanctifying works of the Spirit and counted towards ome's salvation. Number 1. is no different to the world that believes not in God. I mean the Muslims like the Jews observe similar ordinances and therefore have no adoption as they are married to ordinances. I look at Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists and atheists as one in the same group of unbelievers, who know not God.

Jesus followed the Law correctly, we follow Jesus.

 

[Berean777]

...

 

[Berean777]

Jesus followed the Law correctly, we follow Jesus.

Doesn't work that way friend, really think about it.

Jesus followed the law and we follow the law is your reasoning, right?

Well Jesus did this to fulfil the law and so that he alone was sinless and righteous before God, whereby our walk with Jesus and not Moses (law) imputed his righteousness on our account. Because we know that if we followed the law we would miserably fail and so Jesus passed and achieved it as the last Adam and told us to follow him and not the law. Tell me one sentence where Jesus instructs to follow the law?

In fact Jesus looked down upon the ecclesiastical Pharisaical authority as a miserable failure who should not even gotten into the business of following the law or boasting about it.

Matthew 23
3But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in. 14Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation.

15Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.

16Woe unto you, ye blind guides, which say, Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the temple, he is a debtor! 17Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gold, or the temple that sanctifieth the gold? 18And, Whosoever shall swear by the altar, it is nothing; but whosoever sweareth by the gift that is upon it, he is guilty. 19Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gift, or the altar that sanctifieth the gift? 20Whoso therefore shall swear by the altar, sweareth by it, and by all things thereon. 21And whoso shall swear by the temple, sweareth by it, and by him that dwelleth therein. 22And he that shall swear by heaven, sweareth by the throne of God, and by him that sitteth thereon.

23Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone. 24Yeblind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.

25Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess. 26Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also.

27Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness. 28Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.

29Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous, 30And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets. 31Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets. 32Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers. 33Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?

The levitical priesthood being the authority of those days, when Jesus spoke truthfully to the establishment, then he would be literally spelling it out for them that they and all their fathers before them were miserable failures, who are all going to hell.

No wonder to this day the Jews regard Jesus as a revolutionary against the establishment, a rebel so to speak.

Would Jesus say to follow the law or would he say listen to them and obey, but do not do as they do. Do you know why he said this? Because he regarded the establishment as corrupt and as hypocritical at best. Therefore Jesus would not teach the law as he sends his disciples in twos, rather he teaches that he is the law to be followed. So by following Jesus you are observing and following all of God's ordinances and laws. So in this respect Jesus circumvented the establishment and its iron grip on administering the law and ordinances, by telling firstly Jews that he freed them from the law, because he was victorious in keeping all the law.

So that Christ has given us a head start to follow him and not the old Jewish ordinances and mosaic law, then why would anyone want to go back to 1st base. You know the words Jesus stated above calling the establishment hypocrites also applies to those who decide to go back to 1st base.

 

[HebrewVaquero]

Doesn't work that way friend, really think about it.

Jesus followed the law and we follow the law is your reasoning, right?

Well Jesus did this to fulfil the law and so that he alone was sinless and righteous before God, whereby our walk with Jesus and not Moses (law) imputed his righteousness on our account. Because we know that if we followed the law we would miserably fail and so Jesus passed and achieved it as the last Adam and told us to follow him and not the law. Tell me one sentence where Jesus instructs to follow the law?

In fact Jesus looked down upon the ecclesiastical Pharisaical authority as a miserable failure who should not even gotten into the business of following the law or boasting about it.



The levitical priesthood being the authority of those days, when Jesus spoke truthfully to the establishment, then he would be literally spelling it out for them that they and all their fathers before them were miserable failures, who are all going to hell.

No wonder to this day the Jews regard Jesus as a revolutionary against the establishment, a rebel so to speak.

Would Jesus say to follow the law or would he say listen to them and obey, but do not do as they do. Do you know why he said this? Because he regarded the establishment as corrupt and as hypocritical at best. Therefore Jesus would not teach the law as he sends his disciples in twos, rather he teaches that he is the law to be followed. So by following Jesus you are observing and following all of God's ordinances and laws. So in this respect Jesus circumvented the establishment and its iron grip on administering the law and ordinances, by telling firstly Jews that he freed them from the law, because he was victorious in keeping all the law.

So that Christ has given us a head start to follow him and not the old Jewish ordinances and mosaic law, then why would anyone want to go back to 1st base. You know the words Jesus stated above calling the establishment hypocrites also applies to those who decide to go back to 1st base.

"Tell me one sentence where Jesus instructs to follow the law?

Read Matthew chapter 5

 

[jerry kelso]

613 laws
Laws for the Temple, Women, Farmers, Israeli Nationals, Priests ect.... Don't apply to me so that leaves surprisingly few. As for a Feasts, I kept the spring feasts this year, but slacked on the fall feasts except one. Keep most of the laws that apply to me except a few like Tzitzits and wearing different fabrics. Looking to do Tzitzits soon but my local synagogue is reformed and not super serious about a lot. There is always a Talmudic/Rabbinic loop hole some where lol.

hebrewvaquero,

The law of Moses was the old covenant which you think wasn't abolished and yet you say nothing applies to you. Are you a flesh blood jew or a gentile proselyted into judaism. What particular synagogue do you go to?
Do you believe in the new covenant of Christ in his blood? What form of Judaism are you connected with.
Hebrews 8:6-7 says Christ is the mediator of the new and better covenant and that is why the first covenant was replaced. Now I know a bunch of different views but I would like to hear what you believe as your brand of judaism hopefully with no Talmudic/Rabbinic loop hole. LOL Jerry kelso

 

[JLB777]

The following website contains various articles from the Mid-Acts Perspective.

One of them, "Are There Really Two Gospels?," has yet to be disproven.

Biblical Advanced Basics - Doctrinal Topics

Teaching God's people that there are two Gospels is Heresy.

There is one Gospel, and it's the Gospel of the Kingdom of God: Repent, for the Kingdom of God is at hand.


Gentile's receive the Spirit of God the same as Jews.

15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell upon them, as upon us at the beginning. 16 Then I remembered the word of the Lord, how He said, ‘John indeed baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’ 17 If therefore God gave them the same gift as He gave us when we believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could withstand God?”

18 When they heard these things they became silent; and they glorified God, saying, “Then God has also granted to the Gentiles repentance to life.” Acts 11:15-18

This passage is a reference to Acts 10 whereby Peter first preached to the Gentiles.

The Only way Gentiles or Jews are saved is by Repenting.

This is the gospel that Jesus Christ sent Paul to preach to the Gentiles.

15 So I said, ‘Who are You, Lord?’ And He said, ‘I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting. 16 But rise and stand on your feet; for I have appeared to you for this purpose, to make you a minister and a witness both of the things which you have seen and of the things which I will yet reveal to you. 17 I will deliver you from the Jewish people, as well as from the Gentiles, to whom I now send you, 18 to open their eyes, in order to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who are sanctified by faith in Me.’ Acts 26:15-18


Repent is the command of the Gospel.

Not repent of your sins.

Repent means to turn to God.

If you are called to turn to God, then by default you are called to turn from Satan as your lord.

The way that your express this obedience of faith, concerning the Gospel is to confess Jesus as Lord.

This is what grants the believer/obeyer of the Gospel, the forgiveness of sins.


Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. Acts 2:38


Peter did not say "repent of your sins".

A person can not "stop sinning" without the born again new Nature empowered by the Holy Spirit.


The way we are granted this, is by repenting, which means turning away from Satan and his kingdom, and turning to God, and confessing Jesus as Lord.

This is plainly what the Lord Jesus Christ taught to and commissioned Paul to do.


Repent is about being transferred from the kingdom of darkness to the kingdom of God.

It's about changing who you serve, as your Lord.

The Gospel of the kingdom is about changing the kingdom your are in, by changing the lord you serve.
The Gospel is God's call to humanity, to "come out of hiding", in darkness, and to come into the light, the kingdom of light.


JLB